chardonnay9 wrote:

If all you can accomplish is calling names I guess it means you can't
refute what I say. I provide proof of what I say. Nobody else has been
able to do that.

No. You haven't provided a shred of proof. What you've provided is a
couple of links to a biased website that has claims based on no
scientific proof, and a student position paper which also has claims
based on no scientific proof.

Giving anecdotal evidence that you had a dog live to 15 feeding raw is
also not proof. The multiple of anecdote is not data. Millions of kibble
fed dogs live long lives with no problems.

Even more alarmingly, you tend to fling out absolutes that just make you
look (even more) stupid, such as "kibble has no nutritional value." and
"dogs cannot process carbs." Those claims are so easily disproven
through actual scientific fact that the more often you make them, the
dumber you look.